Posted on 11/05/2010 8:58:39 AM PDT by Edgerunner
You’d think the “Separation” clause would demand it :P
I repeat your post to you....
“#1 Separation of church and state.
#2 The amendment prohibits the making of any law “respecting an establishment of religion”
Argument: Cair sues over failure to secure Sharia Law use in court.
Dear Cair,
Your religious law implemented in this manner is a violation of the 2nd Amendment. The use of religious law in this manner has been banned from the beginning of our Nation. It is your organization that is in violation of Oklahoman’s civil rights and your organization should be brought before a court of real Law.”
Care to explain how this is a violation of the 2nd Amendment?
Or are you going to allow the correction that this is in violation of the 1st Amendment?
Phttt....LOL...
Can I have more coffee please!!!
My dyslexic brain is particularly prone to such mixing and matching inappropriately and I would have 50% likely made the same mistake after listing the clauses of the 1st Amendment as #1 and #2 and then talking about point #2 you made about the 1st Amendment as the 2nd Amendment.
How can anyone claim Islam is a religion then argue that Islamic law must be imposed upon those who might not follow that religion?
Laws are the products of a state. Imposing the laws of one state upon another is usually considered an act of war, often done in the aftermath of a war. Ergo, Islam must be a government, not a pure religion, and a government with warlike intentions no less!
Sure, let discovery go forward. Maybe this case will lead to a complete ban on Islam as a religion, since it claims governmental powers!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.